Catholic Ecology

"Our duties towards the environment are linked to our duties towards the human person, considered in himself and in relation to others. It would be wrong to uphold one set of duties while trampling on the other. Herein lies a grave contradiction in our mentality and practice today: one which demeans the person, disrupts the environment, and damages society."
Benedict XVI.
Caritas in Veritate, June 2009.

While I am about to present a few concerns with the
editorial, I want to applaud its intent and much of its content. Anthropogenic
climate change is past debating. It’s an issue that will impact—and one could
argue already is impacting—human life. As the editorial rightly observes,
“[t]his is a human life issue of enormous proportions.” And I agree with its
proposal that "[t]he Catholic church should become a major player in
educating the public to the scientific data and in motivating people to act for
change"—although I don't know why "church" is not capitalized.

And while there is much from the climate conference that
I wish to share—and will over the next few weeks—for now my attention is turned
toward my friends at the Reporter and their troubled call for us to move
forward.

First, let’s consider the title.

Is climate change the “No. 1 pro-life issue”? The
editorial’s author doesn't say this, but the header does. Now, anyone who has
had their work in print knows that headlines are typically the work of someone
other than the author—and that someone may not understand the author’s
intent. And yet, there in large letters is the claim that climate change is
more important than all other crimes against humanity—which I suppose includes
legalized forms of murder, like abortion, which has as its aim the death of
innocents. Issues like climate change arise for reasons other than murder.

Thus the assertion in this headline is as bold as it is wrong.

And anyway, why are we ranking life issues? One moral
theologian I spoke with today said it was “silly” for such a choice to be
offered. I would add that such reckless assertions only cloud what should be
straightforward. For those of us who are responding to climate change in our
professions, the last thing we need is more shadow.

From this problematic title we turn to a problematic
statement:

If there is a certain wisdom in the pro-life assertion
that other rights become meaningless if the right to life is not upheld, then
it is reasonable to assert that the right to life has little meaning if the
earth is destroyed to the point where life becomes unsustainable.

In most Catholic circles that I am aware of, we take
for granted that the right to life presupposes all other rights, since no right
is of any value if one is dead. As for where the editorial takes us—the
destruction of the earth’s ability to sustain life—well, I simply ask for a
little more nuance and some sound, scientifically grounded realities. I
certainly don’t want to see what happens should our planet be subjected to
carbon dioxide levels much higher than they are today—although they probably
will go much higher. The consequences to people and ecosystems will be
terrible. But the world will adapt to such levels and human life will still be
possible even if human civilizations, as we know them today, can’t.

Practically speaking, a growing part of my job requires
me to understand what will happen to water-pollution control infrastructure at
varying projections of greenhouse gas emissions and the resulting consequences.
And it seems that we are already seeing these consequences. Already there are
conversations in my office and throughout the nation about communities
retreating and the relocation of infrastructure. Those issues are difficult
enough to tackle without hyperbole about cascading climate consequences that
will make life—even human life—impossible to exist.

(I have to also note—since it is related to the above—that the editorial for some reason thinks this statement was wise to add:
“While the church has taken it on the chin for centuries-old condemnations of
scientific truths …” If this is a reference to Galileo, than the author(s)
should have read a little more about this oft-used anti-Catholic trope.)

Finally, the editorial concludes with some sound
suggestions and a glaring oversight.

Catholic high schools and colleges have the freedom to
explore these vital issues from both the scientific and ethical perspectives.
They can bring theological perspectives to bear on the issues. Educators and
students could devise ways to become active at all levels, from homes, to
communities, to states, to advocating for legal measures to offset the effects
of global warming.

Finding a fix for climate change and its potentially
disastrous consequences, particularly for the global poor, is not the work of a
single discipline or a single group or a single political strategy. Its
solution lies as much in people of faith as in scientific data, as much or more
in a love for God's creation as it does in our instinct for self-preservation.

The solution will be found in none of these things,
although many of them are necessary. To put it simply: The problem is sin. The
solution is grace—and our cooperation with it.

At the climate conference this week, it was clear to me
that secular voices are growing frustrated—even afraid. The good efforts of
many seem not to be helping, which is why one (very good) workshop on enlisting
the aid of psychology was standing-room only. (More on that later.) I sense
that the authors of the National Catholic Reporter editorial are similarly
frustrated at where things stand. I am, too.

But as Catholic ecologists, we must be upfront that the
Church brings to this global symptom of human sin something more than lectures
and laws. She brings the transformative Gospel of Jesus Christ and the grace that allows this transformation to take root and flourish.

As Christ tells us in the Gospel from this Wednesday, “Whoever remains
in me and I in him will bear much fruit, because without me you can do
nothing.” (John 15:5)

What this means for ecology has been stated many times by
popes and bishops. Bishop Dominique Rey of Diocese of Fréjus-Toulon, France taught
this truth with startling clarity in his ecological pastor letter. And so to
close, here are two passages from the bishop that say what I think the National
Catholic Reporter wanted to:

We are faced with a moral crises: that is to say a crisis
of human choice and human action. Hence, the root of the problem resides in
man’s heart rather than in strictly economic or industrial concerns.

In the Eucharist, we find the possibility of a renewed
understanding of the created world. The Eucharist allows us to uncover the
basis of an integral human ecology; here we find the antidote to radical
individualism and collectivism. The Eucharist allows us to find Jesus’ face in
every person, most especially the poorest. It also enables us to welcome in
creation a gift from God and to thank him continuously for it.

Friday, May 16, 2014

Our conversation with Robert Gronski of Catholic Rural Life continues. Part 1 was posted on May 15th, the Feast of St. Isidore, the patron of farmers and laborers, and can be found here.

Catholic Ecology: You mentioned some of the big issues facing
farmers today and referenced the economic crises that farmers have faced in the
past. You also brought up some environmental concerns due to industrial
agriculture. Is it accurate to say that agriculture is now facing an environmental
crisis?

Robert Gronski: I would say we are headed to a crisis if we don’t
seriously address the web of connections between the production of food, use of
water and generation of energy. This is known by some as the Food-Water-Energy nexus and as you might guess ties into the
discussion about climate change. (I don’t mean the controversy waged between
proponents and denialists; I refer to those in academia, business and
insurance, city governments, military, NGOs and others who are discussing how
to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change.)

It is not surprising to know that agriculture accounts
for a major share of global freshwater use, roughly 70 percent. For Catholic
Rural Life members, we take great interest in how water is used on farms and
what can be done to prevent mismanagement and pollution of streams and
waterways. Over the past couple of decades, we have also taken a great interest
in the connection between water and generation of energy. Fresh water is heavily
drawn for power generation, both for electricity and transportation needs. For
an industrialized nation like the United States, that’s a great deal of water.
For instance, large amounts of energy are required to pump water up from
underground aquifers and to pipe water from one region to another.

When it comes to agriculture, fuel energy is needed to
farm the land and transport food crops, some of which can be turned into
biofuel. That creates a dilemma as we weigh food needs against energy needs. It
is increasingly clear that freshwater resources cannot always meet the water
demands of agriculture, energy generation, public drinking water and industry.
We need to more efficiently manage water supplies: there is no substitute,
except the dwindling possibility of finding or producing more fresh water.

I previously made the remark above that everything begins
and ends with the land when it comes to our work on this earth. Here’s another
sweeping statement: As water goes, so goes human life! If water sources are
imperiled, then all the earth is imperiled. The warnings are there: human
activities have long-term impacts on the land, water, climate and vast
biological life that comprise the ecosystems of our planet.

But despite stern warnings from scientists, we as a
society still aren’t ready to grapple with how our human activities altering
the earth for the worse. Food production is only a part of it, but it is an
essential one. We can lose many conveniences of modern life and still survive;
the bounty of food is not one we can go without.

So we rightly ask: Can people of faith make a positive
contribution to preventing further destruction of our soil and water sources
and other threats to our earth? Church leaders and faith-based thinkers can
help show us how to "green" our Catholic faith.

Following the lead of
Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, Pope Francis promises to guide us in
valuing the goodness of creation, to use creation with gratitude and restraint,
and to live virtuously within and among God’s creation.

CE: Tell us more about how our Catholic faith
informs us about sound agricultural practices. How active are bishops and local
parish priests in the work of supporting our farms—especially family farms?

Our starting point is foundational. God created the world
and all within it. God’s creation is fruitful and meant to sustain the family
of God placed upon the earth. … Everything upon the earth was created to
sustain life. Every plant and animal has
an inherent purpose: an internal, divine genius to live in harmony with the
rest of creation for the sustenance of all life. This vast diversity of seed,
plant and animal life is good, and it expresses God’s beauty. God’s creation
says that God is for Life!

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops have made it
clear in their pastoral reflections that providing food for all is a Gospel imperative, not just another policy
choice. They make it clear that they have integral concerns in how food is
produced and brought to our tables. These fall into the realm of moral and
ethical issues that the Church in the U.S. has grappled with for decades:

Why does hunger persist and how can we overcome it in
the world?

How can we ensure a sustainable food supply for
generations to come?

How can we ensure a dignified life and work environment
for farm families and farmworkers? How can we help rural communities survive
and thrive?

How do we sustain land, water, and other natural
resources in the service of the common good?

How do we build resiliency into agricultural production
that currently depends on cheap fossil fuels and abundant water supplies?

How do we prepare for impending climatic disruptions?

I touched on some of these concerns in my comments above,
but the heart of these questions is how do we serve the least among us: the
poor, the hungry, the disregarded and the disenfranchised. The moral
justification of agriculture – the cultivation of the earth – is to feed and
serve others. When that “cultivation” tears up or disrupts the soil, water and
other natural goods of the earth, then other questions come into play. But the
primary moral justification remains steadfast: we must feed one another.

After moral justification comes social justice: Does the
structure of the agricultural industry benefit some over others? Is there a moral obligation to “save the
family farm”? Gary Comstock, a
professor of philosophy and religious studies, has addressed just this question
and broke it down in parts: “Do family farmers practice better stewardship of
the land than other farmers? Are rural communities better places to live if
they are surrounded by many medium sized farms rather than a few large farms?
Are farm animals treated more humanely on family farms? Can smaller farms take
advantage of economies of scale and produce food as efficiently as larger
farms?” (Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2000, entry on “Agricultural
Ethics”)

Comstock also brings up environmental ethics, pointing
out that humans – as the children of God – have duties to nature in terms of
stewardship. We can read in Psalms that the earth belongs to the Lord; this
fact should inform us that humans must not abuse soil, water, air, and animals.
Can we change our human behavior by realigning our human attitudes towards the
earth and creation? We can ponder that, but let us not neglect the role of
governments and public policies to shape a fair and just agricultural system in
accordance with an ecological spirit.

Government policies, especially at the federal level,
must set the stage by improving ecological management and illuminating how
water-food-energy systems and processes overlap. Otherwise, a policy relevant
to a single resource might actually end up having a negative impact on the rest
of the food, water and energy nexus.

Change can only happen if policy makers, business owners
and consumers alike better understand the interconnections of resource use,
environmental impacts, climate change, and human actions and attitudes. The
choices we make at home and at the grocery store, the decisions made by
business managers, and the policies set by elected officials will affect the
land, our waters and all of creation. This in turn will come back to affect
future generations, for better or worse.

CE: What’s in store for Catholic Rural Life
this year?

Gronski: We are planning a symposium entitled “Vocation of the
Agricultural Leader: Faith, Food and Environment” to be held in St. Paul,
Minn., in early November. It will cover many of the issues I mentioned above.
The idea is to bring together agricultural leaders, theologians, and
environmentalists to address the challenges facing the farming community today.
It is time to formally address the moral and ethical issues of agriculture,
both in respect to providing food for all while understanding the impacts on
the environment.

Jim Ennis, executive director of Catholic Rural Life, is
also working with Catholic partners in Rome to hold an international symposium
along the same lines in 2015. The outcomes and consensus that emerge from these
dialogues will be used to create a comprehensive set of resources to help
agricultural leaders around the world navigate their vocation in the shifting
landscape of the 21st century.

One of the academics slated to speak in November is Dr.Christopher Thompson, a moral theologian who teaches at the University of St. Thomas. He also happens
to be a Board member of Catholic Rural Life. He says that a farmer is called to
be “a prudent steward of God’s creation—an incredible vocation,” but that the
Church in America hasn’t done enough to help farmers address their
responsibilities and tasks in a decidedly Catholic way.

Dr. Thompson, Jim Ennis and the rest of the board and
staff at Catholic Rural Life believe this Faith, Food, and Environment
symposium and project will go a long way toward highlighting the intersection
of Catholic social thought and agriculture. There’s also hope that this is the
start of a larger, more sustained focus on the “theology of food” and
stewardship of creation, possibly including the establishment of a Pontifical
Institutes devoted to agriculture and the environment.

That’s grist for another blog post later this year! To end
for now, let me again ask St. Isidore to pray for us and help all farmers in
their noble vocation on the land. Their trust in God and a spirit of devotion
to the land are the virtues we seek in our world today.

Thursday, May 15, 2014

On the Feast of St. Isidore, the patron of farmers and laborers, we begin a two-part interview with Catholic Rural Life, looking especially at the issues faced by farmers in rural America. Part 2 of the interview can be found here.

Introducing us to the organization is Robert Gronski, a part-time policy
correspondent for Catholic Rural Life. His duties involve tracking federal legislation and
policy perspectives on farm, food, environmental, and rural community
issues, and helps frame these within the perspective of Catholic social
teachings. He joined the staff of CRL in 1999 after completing doctoral studies
in political economy of agriculture at the University of Missouri-Columbia,
Department of Rural Sociology. He also brings an international perspective to
Catholic Rural Life with his development work experiences overseas, mainly
Southeast Asia and the Pacific. Previously based at the CRL office in Des
Moines, Iowa, when he worked as the full-time policy coordinator, Robert now
works part-time from his family home in St. Louis, MO. Contact him
at bob@ncrlc.com.

Robert Gronski

Catholic Ecology: Tell us about Catholic Rural Life. When did
it form? What are its primary goals?

Robert Gronski:Catholic Rural Life, previously known as
the National Catholic Rural Life Conference, was founded in November 1923
during a gathering of bishops, priests and laity meeting in St. Louis,
Missouri. They shared common concerns about Catholic families in rural areas
and thereby determined it was time to form an active
organization. Most Rev. Edwin V. O'Hara, then director of the Rural
Life Bureau of the National Catholic Welfare Conference (which later became the
United States Catholic Conference and eventually the U.S. Conference ofCatholic Bishops), was the energetic guide behind this
rural initiative. O’Hara saw that the rural church was underserved in terms of
priests, churches, and Catholic schools. So in its early years, Catholic Rural
Life was primarily interested in religious education for rural Catholics and
the challenge of anchoring families to the land.

The Great Depression of the 1930s probably shaped the CRL
organization more than anything else during those early years. The economic
plight of farmers occupied a great deal of attention by federal government
officials, not to mention state and local ones. President Roosevelt and others
felt that prosperity for the nation would not return until farming was a decent
livelihood again. Their solution was to create government support programs to
increase the price of farm products. This was part of the much larger New Deal
programs.

The hard times of the Great Depression, coupled with the
environmental challenges of the Dust Bowl era, followed by the trying times of
World War II, created a strange twist: Catholic Rural Life as an organization
attracted more members than at any other time in its history. If you can
imagine life before the internet and digital communications, Catholic Rural
Life somehow maintained an active network of diocesan rural life directors. It
seems we were better known at that time throughout the countryside than we are
today!

I should mention that the most popular and well-known
leader, Monsignor Luigi G. Ligutti,
held the reigns for Catholic Rural Life during the 1940s and 50s. He was the
first executive director by that title and established the main office in Des
Moines, Iowa. Ligutti was a great spokesman for Catholic rural life, and many
thought of him as the personal symbol of the Catholic agrarian movement. He
expressed the importance of family farms and love of the soil as the
foundations of a virtuous nation.

By the way, it was also at this period of time
that St. Isidore the Farmer became the patron saint
of Catholic Rural Life and, of course, to all farmers and farmworkers in the
United States. Initially his feastday was celebrated on March 22, but this was
subsequently changed to May 15. St. Isidore, pray for us!

Let me jump to the early 1980s: this was another rough
stretch for farm families and known by many today as the farm crisis. Fluctuations in the
farm economy, along with the economic and farm policies of the federal
government, took their toll on the countryside. During the 1970s, farmers were
strongly advised to expand acreage and production, which meant carrying heavy
debt loads. But then farm prices fell dramatically as the global economy
faltered and farm exports dried up.

During this period, Catholic Rural Life and dioceses in
farm states groped for ways to respond pastorally to farmers who were either in
danger of losing their farms or had already lost their farms. Social action and
rural life directors started counseling programs and support groups. Efforts
were made to become more active in changing or fixing agriculture policies that
were now detrimental to farmers.

Much of our work today continues to focus on
agricultural, food and environmental policies. We are part of several national
coalitions and efforts; we also connected with international groups, but try to
stay grounded by regular contacts with local groups. Like other membership
organizations that depend on annual dues and grants, we are susceptible to
economic downtowns, such as the one that hit the country in 2007-08. This
curtailed are program work and reduced our active presence for a few years now.

However, Catholic Rural Life is currently regrouping. Our
90th anniversary last November served as impetus: we could persevere knowing we
had made it through rough periods in the past. New staff members have come on
board this year; funding and project grants have picked up again. Many still
believe there is a need for a faith-based group like Catholic Rural Life to
bring a voice of hope to the challenges facing farmers, rural communities, the
environment and the world’s food system in a time of great changes.

CE: What are some of the most important issues
related to farming today?

Gronski: This is a question that can be answered in many ways.
Farmers will look at it one way, agribusiness processors another way,
conservationists and sustainable food advocates yet another way, and even food
consumer groups will have their perspective.

We could spend a great deal of time examining the farmer
category by breaking down the different kinds of farmers or ranchers throughout
the U.S., which region of the country they operate, and whether or not they are
a working farmer on the land. (That might sound strange, but it has to do with
landowners who rent farmland and absentee farm investors.) But let’s skip over
these categories for the moment and highlight what appear to be major concerns
as expressed in the farm press and by agribusiness observers.

The rising cost of industrial agriculture is
certainly near the top of the list. The ever-greater demands on fossil fuel
use, water irrigation and topsoil resources (namely synthetic fertilizers) are
making it increasingly costly to produce sufficient food for a growing
population who still want it cheap and abundant. Just imagine what will happen
– politically, socially, globally – as agricultural resources become not only
scarce, but are depleted in various parts of the country, not to mention the
world. Many further question the very nature of industrial agriculture and whether its grievous impacts on the environment should be allowed to
continue.

This leads to farmland management as a related
and rising critical issue. We cannot continue to drain the nutritional value of
the soil and expect to replenish it with cheap synthetic
inputs. Sustainable agriculture proponents – and Catholic Rural Life is decidedly in this camp – are calling for a new
agrarian mindset of soil and water stewardship. Sound practices must be
renewed, such as crop rotation and use of cover crops, to help the soil
replenish its organic material. Grazing and livestock management also requires
greater attention and care; grasslands can be readily replenished under proper
land and cattle management.

Let me say that everything begins and ends with the land.
The opening chapters of Genesis seem to bear this out when it comes to our life
on this earth! For us in the modern world today, we need to stay aware of
preserving good farmland, particularly near cities and towns where the economic
incentives of urban sprawl tend to outweigh ecological rationality. Even in the
wide-open spaces of rural areas, we need to take care in continually plowing up
marginal lands; that means preserving grasslands that should remain as natural
habitats. Finally, we need to publicly support the stewardship of productive land
on working farms, thus protecting the soils and sustaining our agricultural
production for generations on end.

A third important issue generating a great deal of
discussion is food waste. Some observers have estimated that on a global
basis, we might be wasting as much as one-third of the food coming off the
field. Some waste occurs in the agricultural production process itself; this is
followed by food loss in post-harvest handling and storage; and there is also
loss in processing and distribution. Then there is a sizeable percentage of
food waste by the consumer – you and me! We put too much on our plates and then
throw it out; we buy too much at one time and let it spoil; or we simply don’t
like the look or taste of something – and toss it.

This is the world we live in: sufficient food for many,
yet hunger for some, obesity for others, and an inordinate amount of food waste
still to deal with. As a society, we are alarmed by the human health concerns
of malnutrition, whether too little food or too much. We should become equally
alarmed to the impacts on the environment. The industrial method of production,
the intensive use of fossil fuels and the subsequent waste along the way are
simply not sustainable for the world’s growing population.

Thus, Catholic Rural Life joins with those trying to
change U.S. farm and food policies. Our recent efforts in the new Farm Bill
(more descriptively, Food, Farm and Jobs Bill ) are evidence of that.
But just as important is reconnecting the general public, far removed from life
on the farm, to how their food is grown and processed. This is the beginning of
a solution.

CE: What would you like the average consumer to
know about the farms and the families who feed the rest of us?

Gronski: Catholic Rural Life has for many years now tried to
create awareness among “eaters” (meaning the public) about what is happening in
farming. Our campaign called “Eating is a Moral Act” was a striking
way to engage consumers in relearning where their food came from and what important
issues they should be aware of. By the power of their eating choices, which is
to say consumer choices, they could create change in how food is produced and
who gets to stay on the land and produce that food.

So the “ethics of eating” (as we also refer to it) was
our way to reach out to an urban audience and to the many parishes who no
longer have strong ties – or really any ties – to farms and rural areas. But
they still have a great concern about food and the environment. Catholics, like
many other faith traditions, have always been concerned about hunger and its
primary cause, poverty. They are perplexed as to why farmers are able to
produce so much food and yet many still go hungry. This gets to the other side
of the question: what is really happening in the structure of our food system?
Why is the market failing to feed everyone? Why is the market creating
incentives to erode the ecological foundations of food production?

Farmers and ranchers will grow and produce what people
want to buy and consume. You might say, “Well, of course! Why wouldn’t they?!”
The modern structure of agriculture, however, sets a powerful “middleman”
between farmer and consumer. I’m referring to giant agribusiness corporations
that control the handling, processing and marketing of the food we eat. Farmers
and ranchers are producing for those giant firms since that is how the
structure of the agricultural system in our country works. Because these are
first and foremost business corporations, they “source” (look for, contract
with, buy from) the “most efficient” crop or livestock production – which is to
say the lowest cost at the acceptable quality – and then processing and
packaging the final food products in a way to capture the most profit.

This system works fairly admirably when they are plenty
of competitors vying for the product coming off the farm and the product going
into supermarkets and other food outlets. But when those middlemen become few
and big and powerful, then we become rightfully concerned. They set industry
standards, they heavily influence federal policies, they lose any transparency
they might have had and we can only guess at what we are consuming. (A good
source to learn more about agribusiness concentration and what to do about
it: Organization for CompetitiveMarkets.)

But coming back around to farmers and their families, we
already know that their numbers continue to dwindle. Technology makes that
possible, but I think it is wrong to believe it makes it inevitable. “It’s just
the way it is,” I often hear in reaction to the industrialization of
agriculture and the big getting ever bigger. I say it is the way the powerful
have shaped it.

At Catholic Rural Life, we believe that most farmers and
ranchers feel a vocation towards growing the best food they can for the health
and daily nutrition needs of all people. Our network of members and partners
favor the family farmer and fret over the continued loss of the family farm.
Actually, I believe we will always have family farms: some will just be very
large operations and many will be much smaller “niche” farms. The problem is
not really the size or scale of the farm; it’s whether or not we will have a
sufficient number of farm families who make rural life thrive. It’s not just
about growing food: it’s raising a family, sending kids off to school, filling
shops and churches, and building community. The values it took to make that all
work are the values a country needs to remain secure and sustainable.

Family farms accomplished this in the past, so we should
not let them slip away because it’s more “efficient” to produce food on a giant
industrial corporate scale. (Fortunately we’re not there yet, but the tendency
to head in that direction clearly is.) There is a common belief that family
farmers are good stewards of the land; this was the case when one generation
planned to pass along the family farm to the next. They knew their land and
they took care of it. As today’s farmers retire, however, their children may no
longer see a future in farming; it is a capital-intensive business and the
margins are thin. It is not uncommon for the land to go into the hands of much
larger farm operations or farm investors. Maybe they will be good stewards; but
first and foremost they will be businessmen.

Sunday, May 11, 2014

During my little walk earlier to fetch my newspaper—amonga Mother's Day chorus of birds and bees going about their homemaking chores in a landscape of leaf, grass, and flower—I got to
thinking about a new report on a type of insecticide that is killing bees. Of course, the
death of bees will have some small or large impact on food supplies (which need
bees for pollination). And so this issue about bees is one that we should be aware of. (For the record, the work of "mother bees" is important
enough that it is noted specifically in the Church's Easter Exsultet hymn.)

Neonicotinoids are man-made. They mimic the insecticidal
characteristics of nicotine—which occurs naturally. But as science is showing
us, the use of the artificial variety in the food supply chain is causing problems
that could eventually bring great harm to the systems that feed millions. Perhaps we will soon find a version of neonicotinoids that will not come with bee-hive-collapsing impacts, but at the present this is the matter before us.

Mother’s Day is a day devoted to the natural order of
things—to moms, who make choices to bring new life into the world, and then spend
a lifetime sacrificing for their sons and daughters so that they may someday do
likewise.

What this story about neonicotinoids tells us is that
mimicking nature is not wise when we don’t think enough about the
impacts of our choices. "See where it leads," St. Augustine would say.
It turns out that this is not just true for theology, but for sciences and
technology, too.

There will be time a little later to wrestle with weighty issues. For today, let us pause on this Fourth Sunday of Easter—on this
Mother’s Day—and remember those that gave birth to us and all those who in any
way were like a mom to us.

And may Mary, the mother of us all, hear in our prayers
our love for her, as she also prays for us—for our planet, too. Mary, protector
of life, pray for us!

O Mother most merciful, Mother of compassion,Ark of Salvation, Gate of Heaven,Refuge of sinners and those in despair,To Thee we fly, unto Thy leaven.

O Mother most sweet, most radiant, O Mother of mothers!Mother most pure, Mother most dear,Thee do we entreat sending up our sighs,As Thou bendest to blot every tear.

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

“Sustainable Humanity, Sustainable Nature: Our Responsibility,” the Vatican super-conference of some sixty of the greatest
minds in academia, was apparently so well-received that we might have witnessed not the end of the conversation between the natural and social
sciences, but “the beginning of something, a new sort of communication across
the disciplines.”

Those were the words of conference organizer and
atmospheric scientist Dr. Veerabhadran Ramanathan. He was speaking during one of the
many spontaneous times of reflection during the five-day event, when it
seemed unanimous that the work of this pontifical gathering must continue.

But for now, the event's organizers need to rest. And we
need to ponder all that happened and all that was shared.

What follows is a summary of summaries of conference news and commentary. There is certainly more—or at least there should be—and so if you
know of any other event coverage or commentary, please share it in the comments
below.

while he spoke to us on the way and opened the Scriptures
to us?”Luke 24: 29-32

A productive Vatican conference on global sustainability
has paused for the third Sunday of Easter—a day that offers Luke’s great
Emmaus resurrection account and the finding of Jesus in the breaking of the
bread.

This passage, read today at all Masses across the world,
has much to say about trust, doubt, hope, life, and the often unexpected place
of Christ in our lives. As it turns out, it is particularly meaningful for the
Vatican’s international gathering that is exploring life, relationships, and shared
choices.

"Sustainable Humanity, Sustainable Nature: Our Responsibility" (known in the Twitterverse as #SustVatican)has wrapped up two successful days of deliberations. The event is slated
to end Tuesday evening with a talk by Enrico Berti titled “Social Ethics:
Humanity’s Responsibility Toward Nature,” followed by observations from Andy
Revkin of the New York Times, one of the few reporters covering the event. His
Excellency Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, the chancellor of the Pontifical
Academy of Sciences, will then wrap things up.

Summarizing this conference will be a tall order. Even at
the halfway mark, there is much to consider about science, policy, hopes, and at least one “sad truth.”

I was particularly interested with Saturday’s discussions
on climate change. After a talk by Anil Kulkarni on the use of glaciers as
water supplies, attendees deliberated on how best to communicate the realities
of anthropogenic climate change to those who are suspicious of what science is
telling us.

This led to a heartfelt, pastoral question by Bishop
Sorondo—a question that many of have asked: How do we convince others about the
reality of climate change?

Answering in context of the day’s discussions was the
panel leader Hans Joachim Schellnuber, the founding Director of the Potsdam
Institute for Climate Impact Research and Chair of the German Advisory Council
on Global Change. He noted that research on “black carbon” is concrete enough
to persuade people about localized climate change realities. But as for global
warming? “We need the overall body of evidence … the full picture that is
convincing in the end.”

He then went on to say something important.

“Some people will only be convinced if they’re completely
overwhelmed by the evidence, which may be too late, actually, for their own
sake. That is the sad truth.”

Of course, Bishop Sorondo’s question and Dr. Schellnuber’s answer
are the same ones asked and offered by many involved in the front lines of
ecological protection. My colleagues and I certainly wrestle with these issues.
With my work at the Department of Environmental Management increasingly focused
on how natural hazard from climate change will increasingly impact the Ocean State, I have
become aware that while many people and communities in Rhode Island understand
the dangers they face, others don’t, and some scoff at the very notion of
climate change.

To help authentically communicate the realities of
climate change—and to do so before it is too late—my office is adding public
and media outreach to an upcoming series of vulnerability assessments of
wastewater infrastructure. The hope is that we can use this opportunity to
present what science is showing us by working with the media and others on
outreach throughout a narrow study of vital and low-lying
infrastructure.

The goal will not be to speak down to others, but to
speak with them.

This same point was made yesterday when the story of
Emmaus entered into the homily at my God Daughter’s First Communion. Listening
to the pastor—who is also a friend of mine—it occurred to me that this gospel has
something to say about communicating climate change. Speaking mostly to the
adults, the pastor
stressed that on the road to Emmaus Christ entered into relationship and
listened to the disciples before He tried to teach them anything.

“Teachers sometimes think that they can just teach
without first getting to know the student,” the pastor said. “But no one is
going to listen to you if you don’t listen to them first.”

Like Pope Francis, this pastor is known for his humble
demeanor, his “journeying with,” and his desire to listen to the stories of
others before he lays out in no uncertain terms the truths of the gospels. And
so bringing Christ to others and others to Christ in the Eucharist was at the
center of his homily—because true communication comes when people are
first in an authentic communion.

In the ecological and social realms, the goal of our
encounters with the public and our environmental educational efforts must similarly be this
communion. Providentially, this is precisely the work taking place by all those attending the Vatican's sustainability conference.

The two disciples journeying to Emmaus were busy
discussing the problems of the day when they unknowingly met the Risen Lord and
later recognize Him in the Eucharist. Their experience was similar to St.
Paul’s on his road to Damascus. In encountering and dialoguing with the risen One in their
journeys, their hearts and minds opened and their lives were changed forever.

And so on this Sunday—as we pause and consider our own
journeys, stories, troubles, and hopes—let us continue our prayers for this
important gathering hosted by the Pontifical Academy of Science and the
Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences.

With faith in the transformative grace of God—who is not at all
satisfied with letting others journey alone when night falls around them—may
the truths spoken at this conference be passed throughout the Church and
through the work of others. May these truths thus be made available to all who
journey in the twilight of an age facing difficult choices. And may minds be opened and hearts set on fire so that worry over sad truths
may be quickly replaced with confidence in happy ones.

He said that to tackle today’s ecological
and economic crises we must bring about

an education on environmental values that encourages a
culture of vitality, healthiness, respect and responsibility, and that builds
individuals endowed with a discerning and participative conscience. As long as
it is not addressed in this manner, environmental education will do no more
than supply knowledge on the natural world, overlooking one of its principal
roles: encouraging a change in perception that may be conducive to the
emergence of new values.

In other words, our modern woes are reminding us of the dangers when we disconnect our sciences and technologies from a genuine love of neighbor. The question becomes, then, how does a culture
encourage in its members something as transcendent as love?

The failure to embrace brotherly love—which quite often
coincides with a rejection of God and His grace—has been a perennial concern of
the Church. Leo XIII is especially known for his expression in the nineteenth century of these
concerns. Since then, every pope and a host of bishops,
priests, religious, and lay people have in one way or another underscored the
same exhortation to love, respect, and tend to one’s neighbor.

If only the world would listen.

Well, some in the world are doing just that—most
especially this morning in Rome when a roomful of noted scientists gathered
from around the globe to consider the ecological and economic problems of our
age. That their
conversations would be opened with—and thus illuminated by—the words of
Cardinal Maradiaga (who heads up the Vatican's charitable arm Caritas) is something we should not overlook.

Nor should we ignore that Leo XIII himself can place into perspective this twenty-first century sustainability conference and the cardinal’s
opening talk:

For the Church does her utmost to teach and to train men
… The instruments which she employs are given to her by Jesus Christ Himself
for the very purpose of reaching the hearts of men, and drive their efficiency
from God. They alone can reach the innermost heart and conscience, and bring
men to act from a motive of duty, to control their passions and appetites, to
love God and their fellow men with a love that is outstanding and of the
highest degree and to break down courageously every barrier which blocks the
way to virtue. (Rerum Novarum, 26)

These words, written in 1891, underscore a pithy
statement made this morning by Cardinal Maradiaga: “Nowadays man finds himself
to be a technical giant and an ethical child.”

And so the question: what is the solution to this
imbalance between our technical and ethical abilities? Cardinal Maradiaga’s
answer takes the form of an education that brings us into contact with a certain kind of
truths. The problem is, these truths may lead us to where we may not wish to
go—to a life of routine temperance and sacrifice. Or, in Christian parlance,
to the Cross.

This gets us to a central point of the cardinal’s opening
talk to the gathered scientists. To fully engage our ecological crises we must
encounter a kind of value system that ultimately transcends the scientific
method and economic theories.

In my view, our primary environmental strategy should be
environmental education: this is a pressing and ongoing requirement, because
through an education on the environment, individuals, societies and states will
become aware of the transcendent meaningfulness of the world around us.
Education will thus enable us to constructively absorb the skills, the
experience, the values and the determination that will prompt us to work to
solve both present and future problems in this realm and address them as
challenges pertaining to our responsibility for the sustainability of both the
environment and mankind. (Emphasis added)

So there’s lots of ringside coverage for sure. For my
part—when not attending to family needs here at home this weekend—I’ll keep
posting from the perspective of a former atheist and environmental regulator
who has been writing on the Catholic perspective of ecology for now over ten
years. As such, you might imagine that I am delighted at what the PontificalAcademy of Science and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences are doing—how
they are continuing the thoughts and mission of Leo XIII and his successors so that we today may reverse the often unbridled destruction of so much
of God’s life-giving creation.

More tomorrow. For now, may Almighty God bring rich
blessings to the conference presenters and to all those listening in and
reporting out. May this gathering be very fertile and may its benefits multiply in abundance.

Jesus said, "Have the people recline." Now
there was a great deal of grass in that place. So the men reclined, about five
thousand in number. Then Jesus took the loaves, gave thanks, and distributed
them to those who were reclining, and also as much of the fish as they wanted.
When they had had their fill, he said to his disciples, "Gather the
fragments left over, so that nothing will be wasted."John 6:10-12

Given Pope Francis’s repeated criticism of a widespread
“culture of waste”—a term he often uses to connect critiques of ecological and social
ills—today’s Gospel sets the stage perfectly for a big event kicking off at the
Vatican: the long-awaited conference on the intersection of human desires and
nature’s limits.

What makes the gathering special is the cooperation it is fostering between two academic fields (the natural sciences and social sciences) that speak to each other less than they should. The hope is that in bringing together leaders in these respective fields, the subsequent
dialogue will encourage new and bold insights about how we all might live in
sustainable, healthy, and environmentally friendly ways.

According to the event’s advance publicity, the
pontifical academies seek to offer this inter-disciplinary dialogue in large
part because of the ineffectiveness of recent attempts at finding solutions to
growing ecological crises. Conference organizers note in particular the United
Nation’s Rio+20 Summit on biodiversity preservation.

The Rio+20 conference failed in many respects because it
fostered “no collective endeavour among natural and social scientists,” the
Vatican announcement notes. “That is why we are proposing a joint PAS-PASS
workshop on Sustainable Humanity, Sustainable Nature.”

The Vatican’s goal in doing so, then, is simple:

Our idea is not to catalogue environmental problems. We
propose instead to view Humanity's interchanges with Nature through a triplet
of fundamental, but inter-related Human needs
– Food, Health, and Energy – and ask our respective
Academies to work together to invite experts from the natural and the social
sciences to speak of the various pathways that both serve those needs and
reveal constraints on Nature's ability to meet them.

In other words, the pontifical academies are offering the world's academicians a platform to gather, share, and listen to
each other—and thus to better understand how their individual efforts can, when
brought together, create a symphony of the sciences that can shore up human dignity and the
common good (two aims mentioned by Pope Francis is a recent Tweet).

This focus on the sciences explains why some observers
have expressed concern that there seems to be little place for faith within the conference agenda. (A word search of the event program for “faith” shows no
results. The same goes for "grace" and there is only one notation of "Christ," in the biography of a participant.)

But fear not. This focus on
human reason makes perfect sense. Conference participants will be from a variety of
faiths or have no faith at all. The event should thus not be about how scientific questions intersect with the Christian Creed or sacramental
grace—although given the location, that will be hard to
ignore.

Those who know me may be surprised at my acceptance that this focus on science is the proper path to take for this gathering. While I continually stress
grace and holiness as the preeminent solutions to our ecological woes, one should not
invite guests to dine and discourse and then demand that they speak of a particular topic, especially when that topic is the host's confession of
faith. This is a gathering for some of the world’s top scientists, so we should let science be science (and scientists be scientists) while trusting that the
Spirit will move the conversations where they ought to go—whether they be
external dialogues or the more important internal ones.

As conference organizer Veerabhadran Ramanathan noted in
an interview with me in February, “[at a 2011 Vatican conference on climate
change] I realized our political leaders need help from religious leaders to
exercise moral authority to ask people to protect the air and the water. […]
The world urgently needs religious leaders with moral authority like Pope
Francis and the Dalai Lama.”

And so let us pray fervently as this most important and
special gathering begins today. May the conference organizers, participants,
and guests be inspired to share and listen, so that what unfolds over the next
four days may be blessed, distributed, and shared widely to feed a great
multitude across the globe.

About the author

is an environmental regulator with a Master of Arts in theology. His thesis examined the influences of St. Bonaventure on Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI. In 2010 he was inducted into the Theta Alpha Kappa honor society for theological studies. Most recently he presented at the 2012 International Congress on Medieval Studies.
Bill is a graduate of the University of Rhode Island in mechanical engineering. He is a 25-year employee with Rhode Island's Department of Environmental Management, for which he has received numerous state and federal awards.
Since 2004, Bill has been writing “Catholic Ecology” for the Rhode Island Catholic. He also writes about Catholicism and social commentary for local and national publications, including Catholic World Report and Ignatius Insights.
Bill has most recently completed his new book Catholic Ecology: Its place in Orthodoxy, a Culture of Life, and the New Evangelization. Mr. Patenaude is also a Knight of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem.

What is contained herein is but one person's attempt to teach and defend the Church's teachings—ecological and otherwise. As such, I offer all contents of this blog for approval of the bishops of the Church. It is my hope that nothing herein will lead anyone astray from truth.